Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Counal M eeting <br />M onday, June 29, 2009 <br />Excerpt from M eeting M inutes <br />Attachment B <br />1 based on that noti ce and peopl e' s understandi ng of the appe�arance of a noi se wal I. <br />2 Counci I member Roe opi ned that as I ong as peopl e were noti f i ed, i f they were <br />3 opposed, they would communicate their opposition to the City Council before or <br />4 during the mee�ing; and advised that he had heard little opposition to-date. <br />5 Counci I member Roe noted that there were consi derati ons to be gi ven to the <br />6 payoff i n noi se reducti on versus vi si bi I i ty. Counci I member Roe noted that he <br />7 woul d not have supported approval had he he�ard suff i ci ent opposi ti on. <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />Klausing moved, Johnson seconded, adoption of Resolution No. 10722 entitled, <br />" Resol uti on i n Support of a Noi se Wal I to be Constructed on the North Si de of <br />H i ghway 36;" as a part of the Ri ce Street i nterchange proj ect. <br />12 <br />13 M ayor K I ausi ng spoke i n support of the moti on; opi ni ng that i t was up to a <br />14 maj ori ty of i mpacted resi dents, noti ng that al I woul d not be happy; but echoi ng <br />15 Counci I member Roe' s comments rel ated to maj ori ty support. M ayor K I ausi ng <br />16 offered his respect to those in opposition; however, he remained confident that, <br />17 even if there were a fe�v more residents heard from by delaying this action, the <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />majority would support moving forward. <br />Councilmember Ihlan reiterated her preference to hear from more citizens on this <br />proposal . <br />Counci I member Johnson opi ned that the Ci ty woul d sd dom rec� ve 100% <br />participation; however, he further opined that the City had performed their due <br />di I i gence i n sendi ng out the noti ces, and that the comments recei ved were <br />representati ve of those i mpacted by the proj ect, and expressed hi s conf i dence that <br />those remai ni ng resi dents woul d be present i f they were opposed to the proj ect. <br />29 Rdl Call <br />3 0 Ayes Johnson; I hl an; Roe; and K I ausi ng. <br />31 Nays None. <br />Page 5 of 5 <br />